the federation is clearly expansionist. is one of the criticisms eddington makes when he joins the maquis!
Through conquest and fear, which is what Deks noted? O_o He didn't say the Federation didn't want to expand.
No, a few survived. In ST:FC, Riker said there were "very few governments left" after WW III. He didn't say there were NONE left... And in TNG's "The Royale", there is a United States flag with 52 stars, which (according to dialogue) came from somewhere between 2033 and 2079. WW III took place in 2053, so therefore the USA was one of the nations that survived the war. No, it wasn't. The Vulcans may have helped in the cleanup and rebuilding after WW III, but they had nothing to do with creating the state of United Earth. Humans did that on their own. What government isn't? Eddington is full of shit.
Governments and countries aren't the same entities, many countries have had multiple successive governments through the centuries.
Most of the countries of the world are not expansionists, in reality, at present, expasionism is not something well seen, for something there was a lot of criticism worldwide of the Russian annexation of Crimea and the Chinese repression in Hong Kong. most countries defend territorial integrity and static borders. without the arrival of the Vulcans, humans would not have created a world government. maybe some countries survived but the world was destroyed and in chaos. the maquis were freedom fighters and eddington a hero!
Just because the Federation expands it doesn't make it imperialistic (furthermore, the Federation enacts diplomacy and it certainly doesn't lie or force anyone to get them to join). Heck, Chakotay and Janeway even quoted a regulation that PREVENTED the Federation and other major powers (in the 24th century at least) from expanding into other quadrants of the galaxy. Eddington was bitter/resentful/emotional because the Federation chose not to intervene in the DMZ to save the Maqui (who willingly decided to remain there knowing full well the conditions) - in short, the guy was a moron. Do I think the Federation may have done more to protect its former citizens in the DMZ? Possibly... but with limited options a delicate treaty in place, it was either that, or engage in yet another round/war with Cardassia (and we've seen that neither the Federation nor individual Cardassian captains/Guls wanted that outcome - sans perhaps Cardassia military).
But that technically doesn't tell us anything about the condition it existed in after WW III. For all we know it was some rump state consisting of a couple military bases and towns ion Alaska or Colorado or somewhere that merely still laid claim to the 52 states without having any power to actually enforce that claim due to the Post Atomic Horror. Or it just kept the 52 stars for tradition. Or there might have been multiple polities after WW III who all claimed to be the legitimate continuation of the USA, and one or more of them just used the flag with 52 stars.
You do not remember correctly at all. Independent nations continued existing well after the third world war, and Earth did not become a truly united world until the year 2150, one year prior to the start of the series Enterprise. I mean, come on, this is one of the hot button argument issues in Trek canon, given the time it was mentioned, in TNG Attached, Dr. Crusher hypothetically asks what if Australia hadn't agreed to this, prompting a large fraction of fandom to believe Australia was a hold-out when it came to forming a United Earth.
Logically, there are only two options: a) Australia was among the few not to join until 2150 sharp b) Australia was among the many not to join until 2150 sharp Take your pick. Absolutely forbidden interpretations include "Australia had already joined before 2150" (because then it could not be used as the hypothetical example at all) or "Australia was the sole nation not to join until 2150" (because then there could be no "what if, SAY, Australia" leeway in what Crusher says, but there is exactly that leeway). Allowed interpretation "a" may be taken to mean "Australia was a holdout", then. But obviously not in the sense that Australia should be expected to have harbored ill will towards the UE or something. They just weren't among the wholly speculative bunch of nations that would have joined at a completely putative earlier opportunity. Slightly complicating this is the knowledge that things called United Earth existed long before 2150. The UESPA is heard of a century earlier, say. But this is neither here nor there, because even today, ITRW, the world is full of things named United Earth, without this meaning anything at all. Just like the world is full of things named Royal even when no peerage records exist to support the claim... Timo Saloniemi
Did New York stop being a state when the USA was formed? The EU still has a France a Germany and a Belgium. Great Britain still has a Wales, Scotland and an England, these countries still exist as part of the UK . There is no reason for countries to dissolve under a fictional UE system in the Trek. The novels have the President of the USA visiting the Starfleet ruins after the Breen attack, by the role will probably be like the major or governor of a major piece of territory
That I guess is the crucial bit: nothing like that ever happens outside novels. For all we know, every single Liechtenstein still survives exactly as was, and there are local monarchs and whatnot. Or then the nations of WWIII were so vilified for their role that they were chopped up and rearranged simply because they finally could, around the 2070s-80s. Timo Saloniemi
No indication they are xenophobic. They are isolationist and Earth first but nothing to suggest they are human first
The governments may have fallen but the countries did not all dissolve. For instance O'Brien is Irish in the show so being from Ireland still counts for something even if there is no government of Ireland like we would know today. And using geographic areas would still make sense for government. In Ireland now we vote for representatives of our area on local county council then our county representative in national government and regional representative for EU government so have UE would just change EU rep to UE rep and add a layer of the Russian doll by giving a vote for Earth rep in the federation
Wherever was it said that O'Brien is Irish? He just speaks the dialect, knows the stories and songs, enjoys the customs. But he isn't Irish, not in TNG or DS9 the shows. He's a Fed. And a human, on occasion, but that's as corner-patriotic as it gets. Whether being all of the above, plus definitely born in Ireland, actually means "being Irish" is so far unknown. Possibly the expression in the late 24th century is "being Celtic"? Or perhaps "being American", assuming the US conquered the UK before such things ceased to matter. Few born in Barcelona would consider themselves either "Romans" or "Moors" today, even if there may be an argument for both "Spanish" and "Hell, no, anything but!". Timo Saloniemi
How many more things do you need to be Irish. Citizenship of countries may be gone but O'Brien is still Irish and Picard is French. Sisko is another who is definitely culturally African American even if his passport just says Earth. I can't remember but when Data talks about Irish reunification is it not a statement aimed at O'Brien which would show people see him as Irish as well as an earthling
In Bar Association O'Brien talks about one of his ancestors being a union coal miner in Pennsylvania in the late 19th/early 20th century. This seems to suggest his family history is a bit more complicated.
Maybe not. I always took that as a reference to the Irish Molly Maguire activists in Pennsylvania in the 19th century. But anyway I'm not saying he is a citizen of Ireland in the 24th century as we have no way of knowing what exists in a political sense in Star Trek but the notion of cultural nationality definitely exists proven by the fact that much lick Robaird and Jean-Luc or ensign Pawel Checkov people still use national specific names
Picard has been saying for decades that he's from France or (today) lives in France. Not "the French region" or "the area that was France". That tells me that there are still countries even during the Fed era if, for any other good reason, as administrative districts.
Also they are still using national boundaries for sport in the 22nd century as Archer tells Malcolm that "England won the soccer world cup"
Plenty of people today hail from locations that no longer exist in practice; say, a former town may have been absorbed into a city and does not even exist as one of its districts any longer, but still has "inhabitants" including ones who were born long after the dissolution. So Picard speaking of France really does not mean France would need to exist, except within his head. There will always be Paris, even if the city ceases to be. Riker's mental identity is Alaskan, not Canadian. It does not follow that Alaska would be a state, or that the boundary between Alaska and Canada would be a national or otherwise administrative one. Or that two people would agree on what that boundary really is. Sure, we can imagine nothing changes as centuries pass. But the point is that the writers are not limited by that, and are free to establish the emergence of a neo-Burgundy that totally replaced Germany and France as political entities both, before joining the UE in 2146 or whatever. And that O'Brien isn't an Irishman until he says he is, which he doesn't. Timo Saloniemi